Github user mattyb149 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1407#discussion_r95627157
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/GenerateTableFetch.java
---
@@ -115,20 +128,36 @@ public GenerateTableFetch() {
@OnScheduled
public void setup(final ProcessContext context) {
+ // The processor is invalid if there is an incoming connection and
max-value columns are defined
+ if (context.getProperty(MAX_VALUE_COLUMN_NAMES).isSet() &&
context.hasIncomingConnection()) {
+ throw new ProcessException("If an incoming connection is
supplied, no max-value column names may be specified");
--- End diff --
The original concern is for tables that don't share the same name for
max-value column. Now that you mention it, I agree that we could allow for a
static string or EL result (maybe without using an incoming flow file?), and
just document that all the specified tables must contain the max-value columns.
This makes it consistent with Column Names, which currently doesn't have that
check but has the same requirement. I will add doc to both and update the
logic, thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
